There is a
Better Road to Travel (Feb.2003) The
trap tier plan being proposed by the Commonwealth’s Marine Fisheries
Division is not going over very well with the vast majority of this
state’s lobster fishermen.
Actually, that’s probably an understatement. They are adamantly
against it. We’ll
leave it at that for now.
The only fishermen who may not mind the idea are the very few
who may qualify for the 800 trap allocation while a majority of
fishermen will see a cut in what they can fish.
As
this trap tier allocation system gets discussed and evaluated, more
and more complications, inequities and doubts seem to surface. While it may at first seem
simple, as one looks deeper, it’s a nightmare. One might also question what
it really accomplishes besides upsetting many current fishing
operations and hurting fishermen’s incomes. Much of the rationale behind
the idea is based on speculation, a desire to have something the
“same” in lobsterland and to serve as a substitute for other
measures developed by fishermen and passed by the Atlantic States
Marine Fisheries Commission.
Remember
the “best scientific information available” wording that has
constantly been pushed in our face as being what managers must
consider? Well in this
case, that information doesn’t indicate that the overall trap
numbers in the state are out of control. The hype to have this plan
is more speculating on a potential. Area plans were developed
based on different levels of a stocks condition and there are three
different lobster stock areas.
Things weren’t the “same” in all those areas and based on
that, the various lobster area plans couldn’t be the same
either. The approved
provisions were designed by fishermen working with biologists and
managers and were deemed to have a benefit for the resource. The trap cap plan as
currently proposed, however, really doesn’t accomplish the same
benefit for the resource.
It is therefore not a very good
substitute.
The
state’s trap plan on the other hand, will hurt more fishermen then
the ASMFC’s approved plan would ever do. The trap plan would be very
good at creating acrimony between the industry and state
managers. It would be a
good way to create animosity between fishermen. It would do a good job at
fostering non-compliance and making law enforcement work much harder
as that money-strapped agency tries to find all those who might be
tempted to sneak a few more traps out into the deep blue sea in
order to keep their businesses afloat. As the system would develop,
we could have hundreds of different individual trap limits; find
me if you can!?
This isn’t the right road to get bogged down in at this
time. This isn’t the
correct vehicle to try and push up this slippery
slope.
This
is not to say that there isn’t some way to address the Division’s
fears, which although fed by speculation should be addressed by
industry in some way.
We do believe that there are some ways to tackle these
concerns.
So
how do we all get out of this mess? We would urge the Division
to pull this plan back for now and examine the benefits of pursuing
another road. Try this
one!
1.
Adopt
the ASMFC area plans at least in some form. Some “tinkering” with the
Area 1 v-notch definition and the Outer Cape Trap Plan would be
appropriate and probably passable at the ASMFC level. Maybe a form of the
Division’s trap plan could work for the Outer Cape area where those
fishermen did include a trap cap and reducing program in their
original plan. Work
with the fishermen in those areas to get those two parts in
place.
2.
Allow
time for these plans to work.
3.
Meet
with the fishermen to monitor the progress of all the plans. Keep doing
it.
4.
Work
with the fishermen to design or adjust some state provisions to
address the concerns that are troubling the Division regarding
effort.
Adjustments
and additions may be needed to make the plans work better or to
address some glitch that surfaces. There is nothing wrong with
finding that all plans don’t work perfectly. We have never seen a fishery
plan that worked perfectly and that never needed some
adjustment. Working
with the state’s lobstermen, these bumps in the road can be
fixed. Afterall, the
lobstermen are the experts in the fishery and the state is the
expert in moving plans through a process and overseeing the
program.
It
would be a tragedy to allow the Division’s Trap Cap Plan as proposed
to hurt so many fishermen for so little gain. It would also be a shame to
place fishermen against fishermen, to destroy the progress that has
been made in cooperative management and it would be tragic to ruin
the cooperation that has existed between the Commonwealth’s Marine
Fisheries Division and this state’s lobster fishing
industry.
Potholes
can ruin your tires and your
progress.
Bill
Adler, Executive Director
|